The Sermon on the Mount, found in Matthew chapters 5-7, contains some of Jesus' most well-known teachings, including the Beatitudes, the Lord's Prayer, and other notable ethical and moral maxims. When studied in light of other Jewish texts from the Second Temple and Rabbinic periods, we can gain a deeper understanding and discover new insights behind the message being expressed in Matthew’s Gospel. Exploring the dense intertextual connections between the Sermon on the Mount and other writings found in deuterocanonical literature, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Hellenistic literature, and Rabbinic material can bring new life to texts with which we may be otherwise familiar.
The Sermon is undoubtedly Jewish in its form and content and has its ultimate origins in the Judaism of the Second Temple period. However, as many readers, whether devotional or academic, have pointed out, its reach has grown far beyond its internal literary boundaries. As Hans Dieter Betz has summarized, “… [it is] from the outset a text that commands respect. Indeed, these texts are in many ways awe-inspiring, or perhaps it is better to say that their long tradition in Christian and even in world literature has dignified them to an extent that modern readers cannot escape … that the Sermon on the Mount involves discussion of issues of Jewish religion has meant that this text has always been attractive to readers who did not fail to discover that it is really part of their own religious thought.”1
The beatitudes, which begin the Sermon on the Mount, have a distinctive literary style and history. They are short, pithy sayings that pronounce blessing or happiness when following the connected precepts. Notably, there is no surrounding narrative or context provided. This format aligns them closely with the genre of wisdom proverbs and the style is found in several literary families prior to the writing of the New Testament. In Matthew’s Gospel, they are structured and expressed consecutively with no break:
Then he began to teach them by saying: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied. Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God. Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. (Matthew 5:2-10)
While the content is not identical, we see the same form of beatitude used in the deuterocanonical book of Sirach:
I can think of nine whom I would call blessed, and a tenth my tongue proclaims: a man who can rejoice in his children; a man who lives to see the downfall of his foes. Blessed the man who lives with a sensible wife, and the one who does not plow with ox and ass together. Blessed is the one who does not sin with the tongue, and the one who has not served an inferior. Blessed is the one who finds a friend, and the one who speaks to attentive listeners. (Sirach 25:7-9)
While the following text from the Dead Sea Scrolls is a bit fragmented, we still find the same literary structure pre-dating the New Testament, and in this case more similar (although still not identical) content:
[Blessed is] ... with a pure heart and does not slander with his tongue. Blessed are those who hold to Wisdom’s precepts and do not hold to the ways of iniquity. Blessed are those who rejoice in her, and do not burst forth in ways of folly. Blessed are those who seek her with pure hands, and do not pursue her with a treacherous heart. (4Q5425)2
In both of these cases, we can see that the literary structure of the beatitudes was well established in Jewish literature prior to the time of the New Testament. Hershel Shanks highlights this relationship between the Qumran community and the early Christian community via their literary connection: “What the scrolls show is that in almost every respect the message of early Christianity was presaged in its Jewish roots. And even the life of Jesus, as told in the Gospels, is often prefigured in the scrolls. The beatitudes, for example, familiar from the Sermon on the Mount, have their counterpart in the scrolls ... The literary genre to which it belongs is the same as that found in the Gospel of Matthew.”3
Additionally, we can see the other side of this spectrum between form and content in how later Rabbinic writings parallel the content but not the structure found in early in Matthew 5. While there are many examples to choose from peppered throughout Talmud and Midrash, one notable example is from the Babylonian Talmud, expressing a similar maxim from the beatitudes regarding the “lowly in spirit”, or those who are humble:
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Come and see how great the lowly in spirit are before the Holy One, Blessed be He … with regard to one whose spirit is lowly, the verse ascribes him credit as if he had sacrificed all the sacrificial offerings. (Sotah 5b)4
The beatitudes' proverbial style likely reflects the oral and literary culture in which Jesus spoke. Like other wisdom teachers, he taught largely through easily memorable sayings that were handed down and circulated. The self-contained, aphoristic beatitudes represent the kind of oral-derived teaching well suited for proclamation among the common people of Galilee and Judea. Their origin is sapiential, or wisdom-oriented, rather than narrative.
Looking further into chapter 5, past the beatitudes, we see a shift in literary structure but still find a series of sermonically structured, pithy, wisdom-oriented sayings discussing variety of subjects, including the role of the Torah, how to structure and manage interpersonal-relationships, how to work through marriage, the ethics of oath taking, and even perhaps the most famous of all the sayings from this chapter, the maxim to love one’s neighbor.
We see multiple echoes of this material, again spread throughout the same families of literature, the deuterocanon, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and in Rabbinic literature. The Dead Sea Scroll designated 1QH, also known as the Thanksgiving Hymns, highlights a well-known saying:
The scorn of my enemies shall become a crown of glory, and my stumbling shall become everlasting might ... and my light shall shine forth in your glory. For as a light from out of the darkness, so too will you enlighten me. (1QH)
Mathew echoes similar language of “letting your light shine”:
You are the light of the world. A city located on a hill cannot be hidden. People do not light a lamp and put it under a basket but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before people, so that they can see your good deeds and give honor to your Father in heaven. (Matthew 5:14-16)5
Continuing on, we find maxims shared between Sirach and Matthew’s gospel with regard to sexual boundaries:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to desire her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)
Sirach expresses a similar ethic that these boundaries begin with what one looks at:
Do not look intently at a virgin, or you may stumble and incur penalties for her. Do not give yourself to prostitutes, or you may lose your inheritance. Do not look around in the streets of a city, or wander about in its deserted sections. Turn away your eyes from a shapely woman, and do not gaze at beauty belonging to another; many have been seduced by a woman's beauty, and by its passion is kindled like a fire. (Sirach 9:5-8)
Remarkably, we find a third echo of this same sexual ethic, worded very similarly in a Midrash to Leviticus known as Leviticus Rabbah:
You must not suppose that only he who has committed the crime with his body is called an adulterer. If he commits adultery with his eyes, he is also called an adulterer; for it says, ‘The eyes also of the adulterer.’ Now this adulterer sits and watches expectantly for the moment when twilight will arrive, when evening will come… (Leviticus Rabbah 12)6
These conceptual parallels between Sirach, Leviticus Rabbah, and Matthew's Gospel demonstrate how important teachings, especially regarding sexual ethics, defy attempts to draw firm boundaries between different wisdom and literary traditions. All three texts represent distinct eras, with Sirach produced at least two centuries older than Matthew and Leviticus Rabbah written at least three centuries after that. Yet all three texts share remarkably similar expressions of the role of the eyes in maintaining sexual purity.
Not only do these texts represent different genres of culture and literature, but they originated in different linguistic spheres - the earliest version of Sirach was mostly written in Hebrew, Matthew's gospel being written in Greek, and Leviticus Rabbah in either late Mishnaic Hebrew or Aramaic. Yet these common attitudes regarding adultery show how ancient wisdom easily transcended the boundaries of language. Ethical teachings like this were widely dispersed, adapted, and shared and this degree of sexual fidelity was a core value that Jewish and early Christian communities alike upheld and transmitted through their own writings.
Rounding out chapter 5 of the Gospel, we see additional parallels across many differing points of emphasis, with another key example touching on the ethics of oath taking. Matthew expresses this via the pithy saying:
Do not take an oath by your head because you are not able to make one hair white or black. Let your word be ‘Yes, yes’ or ‘No, no.’ More than this is from the evil one. (Matthew 5:36-37)
The notable Hellenistic Jewish author Philo, who lived contemporaneously with Jesus and wrote in the decades just preceding the production of the New Testament, shares a similar saying in The Special Laws:
… these men also deserve to be praised who, when they are compelled to swear, by their slowness, and delay, and evasion, cause fear not only to those who see them, but to those also who invite them to take an oath; for when they do pronounce the oath they are accustomed to say only thus much, "Yes, by the …" or, "No, by the …" without any further addition, giving an emphasis to these words by the mutilation of the usual form, but without uttering the oath. (The Special Laws, 2.5)7
Similarly, to Jesus’ teaching, Philo here praises those who take oaths without the need to add any language or attach additional promises that would make one more reliable or trustworthy. In other words, truthfulness or trustworthiness makes oathtaking itself unnecessary and actually undermines one’s perception in these ancient cultures.8 This is further emphasized by another echo of the same maxim in Rabbinic literature:
Rabbi Huna said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak: The righteous, their 'yes' is yes and their 'no' is no, as it is stated: “As the man will not rest unless he finishes the matter today.” (Ruth Rabbah 7)9
While there are countless more examples that could be shared, two more notable parallels in this section are notable, with another echo shared with Sirach regarding the necessity of sharing with those less fortunate:
Do not grieve the hungry, or anger one in need. Do not add to the troubles of the desperate, or delay giving to the needy. Do not reject one who needs to borrow in distress, or turn your face away from the poor. Do not avert your eye from the needy, and give no one reason to curse you. (Sirach 4:2-5)
Matthew echoes a similar sentiment, shared in the well-known saying about going above and beyond in support of others:
If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to the one who asks you, and do not reject the one who wants to borrow from you. (Matthew 5:41-42)
Scholars and careful readers have noted how in this specific instance, Sirach and Matthew may likely share an ethic that may even go above and beyond shared traditions in the Hebrew Bible or the Septuagint.10
Finally, an example from an Aramaic Targum may shed light on specific language used in the Sermon on the Mount. We find in a literary expansion in the Targum to the Torah known as Pseudo-Jonathan:
Sons of Israel, my people, as our Father in heaven is merciful, so shall you be merciful on earth: neither cow, nor ewe, shall you sacrifice along with her young on the same day. And when you offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving to the Name of the Lord, you shall offer so as to be accepted. (Pseudo-Jonathan Leviticus 22)
While it may not be immediately obvious given traditional English renderings of Matthew 5, there is a conceptual parallel to be found:
If you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they? And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do? Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they? So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:46-48)
While the technical details within the Greek of Matthew 5 are beyond the scope of this discussion, scholars have noted that what may actually be expressed in the language of “being perfect” is actually an emphasis on being merciful, and the sentiment in the Targum here to Leviticus is often utilized as a parallel expression of mercy being a definitive way to emulate the divine.11
There is admittedly so much more here to be discussed regarding the density of intertextuality between Matthew chapter 5 and other Jewish literature, whether from the Deuterocanon, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Targums, Hellenistic literature, and on into Rabbinic literature. This discussion has barely scratched the surface, and the density continues on into the following chapters of Matthew’s gospel.
Reading the Sermon on the Mount with an intertextual perspective helps demonstrate how Jesus' teachings, found in Matthew’s gospel, emerge from and interact with Jewish ethical and literary soil. Recognizing these numerous echoes and parallels across a wide array of subcultures can help modern readers hear Jesus' words as his first-century Jewish audience would have understood them and how His teachings resonate with known and established traditions.
Betz, Hans Dieter A Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, Including the Sermon on the Plain (pp. 1-2) Fortress Press, 1995
Shanks, Hershel The Mystery and Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls (p. 64) Random House, 1998
Baasland, Ernst Parables and Rhetoric in the Sermon on the Mount: New Approaches to a Classical Text (pp. 225-226) Mohr Siebeck, 2015
Hron, Ondrej Hamartiological Heuristics as a Hermeneutical Key to Justice, Mercy and the Moral Treatment of the Poor in the New Testament (pp. 56-58) Charles University in Prague, 2008
Chilton, Bruce "From Aramaic Paraphrase to Greek Testament" in Evans, Craig A. (ed.) From Prophecy to Testament: The Function of the Old Testament in the New (pp. 23-43) Hendrickson Publishers, 2004